Maybe I have to explain how this "I try to produce as litte of an issue for the planet (for heaven)." Works in the real world.
I dont't own a car. I dont make long distance vactions. I dont have children. I hardly ever eat meat.
People that do everything of the above - still tell me, that I should buy less plastic bags if I literally go two miles to my next supermarket. Not knowing, that paper packaging actually has a higher CO2 footprint overall, because its heavier, and uses more energy being delivered to stores.
They tell me, that I should do it (f.e. use reusable hemp bags), because everyone has to show a little effort and try to abstain from something they liked previously in their lives.
I'm intelligent enough to see - that this is a race to the bottom, more affluent people will use every day to keep lower classes from attaining middle class privileges.
Its mostly signaling without substance. It produces unintended negative feedback loops. (Doing that, makes oil cheaper for australia, which has just politically decided not to do any of it.) Its highly unethical.
And the only payout - will be in the fourth generation down the road.
If you want to sell me on the health benefits - cure cancer (cells stopping to regenerate themselves without errors after a fixed set of cycles) first.
Thats the sad logic.
If you are cycling to your appointments, being all happy - that you are saving the world. You are in a cult.
A socially accepted one, but a cult nevertheless.
The point where our opinions meet again is, that if everyone reduces their aspiration of economic progress, you buy people working on the energy transition issue more time.
The difference is, you can do it with a blessed smile on your face, and I cant. I see 'negative growth' as less growth. No social progress. Increasing societal issues in the mid term. Without having any chance to divert from that politically, because its fixed.
The children in germany were only needed for the "some of us now do it out of their own volition" part. Voluntarily. If you want to icrease voluntarily, you rase marketing spending. Which feels also kind of odd.
From an overview perspective of what is needed, yes - I should experience the third recession in my lifetime, and and then look forward to a society where in a short period of time about a third of the work force is expected to loose their jobs (automation). But then, knowing that doesnt help.
To make it a full argument - at the same time the political movement to produce a carbon tax that would encompass all sectors, doesnt get anywhere - because it harms the private sector ('jobs'). So its now expected from me, that I do what I don't want to, that harms me more than most people I know, that I can't freely chose (because its not based on a 'economy'), that brings me no benefit, that produces large scale believes that I don't agree with, thats out there to harm my generations economic outlook, while knowing, that I cant do anything about it politically - and shouldnt do anything about it, if I look at it as a big picture issue. While seeing societies in China, India, even the US, still on a steeper growth path than Europe, or Japan historically in decades...
While having read articles, that the fridays for future movement has NO, I reapeat, no short - or mid term plans (in fact they have no plans at all), but purely are a PR and faith based operation, that wants to remind people of self stated UN goals. And they do it without knowing, or caring about any social impacts ('i guess it has to be done in a socialy responsible matter' - but it has to be our highest policitcal goal because - and I quote: "we should all panic", and "we have no time".).
Am I correct so far?
I dont't own a car. I dont make long distance vactions. I dont have children. I hardly ever eat meat.
People that do everything of the above - still tell me, that I should buy less plastic bags if I literally go two miles to my next supermarket. Not knowing, that paper packaging actually has a higher CO2 footprint overall, because its heavier, and uses more energy being delivered to stores.
They tell me, that I should do it (f.e. use reusable hemp bags), because everyone has to show a little effort and try to abstain from something they liked previously in their lives.
I'm intelligent enough to see - that this is a race to the bottom, more affluent people will use every day to keep lower classes from attaining middle class privileges.
Its mostly signaling without substance. It produces unintended negative feedback loops. (Doing that, makes oil cheaper for australia, which has just politically decided not to do any of it.) Its highly unethical.
And the only payout - will be in the fourth generation down the road.
If you want to sell me on the health benefits - cure cancer (cells stopping to regenerate themselves without errors after a fixed set of cycles) first.
Thats the sad logic.
If you are cycling to your appointments, being all happy - that you are saving the world. You are in a cult.
A socially accepted one, but a cult nevertheless.
The point where our opinions meet again is, that if everyone reduces their aspiration of economic progress, you buy people working on the energy transition issue more time.
The difference is, you can do it with a blessed smile on your face, and I cant. I see 'negative growth' as less growth. No social progress. Increasing societal issues in the mid term. Without having any chance to divert from that politically, because its fixed.
The children in germany were only needed for the "some of us now do it out of their own volition" part. Voluntarily. If you want to icrease voluntarily, you rase marketing spending. Which feels also kind of odd.
From an overview perspective of what is needed, yes - I should experience the third recession in my lifetime, and and then look forward to a society where in a short period of time about a third of the work force is expected to loose their jobs (automation). But then, knowing that doesnt help.
To make it a full argument - at the same time the political movement to produce a carbon tax that would encompass all sectors, doesnt get anywhere - because it harms the private sector ('jobs'). So its now expected from me, that I do what I don't want to, that harms me more than most people I know, that I can't freely chose (because its not based on a 'economy'), that brings me no benefit, that produces large scale believes that I don't agree with, thats out there to harm my generations economic outlook, while knowing, that I cant do anything about it politically - and shouldnt do anything about it, if I look at it as a big picture issue. While seeing societies in China, India, even the US, still on a steeper growth path than Europe, or Japan historically in decades...
While having read articles, that the fridays for future movement has NO, I reapeat, no short - or mid term plans (in fact they have no plans at all), but purely are a PR and faith based operation, that wants to remind people of self stated UN goals. And they do it without knowing, or caring about any social impacts ('i guess it has to be done in a socialy responsible matter' - but it has to be our highest policitcal goal because - and I quote: "we should all panic", and "we have no time".).
Am I correct so far?
Last edited by notimp,
